On December 26, 1996, the beaten and strangled body of six-year-old JonBenet Ramsey was found hidden in the basement of her Boulder, Colorado home. Immediately, police and media suspicion focused on her wealthy parents, John Bennet Ramsey and Patricia (Patsy) Ramsey, as being responsible. Now—twenty-five years later—the child beauty queen’s cold case has little new to offer except for the stupid suggestion that JonBenet never really died and that she’s actually the pop-star, Katy Perry.
Setting crazy conspiracy theories aside, the fact remains that someone viciously slaughtered JonBenet. The little girl became a cultural obsession, and the person or persons guilty of JonBenet’s murder were never prosecuted. Was it a lack of viable suspects? Lack of admissible evidence? A homicide investigation mishandled right from the start? Or was it failure to properly decipher the murder mystery’s most important clue—the ransom note?
Here’s a look at what the case facts tell us about who really murdered JonBenet Ramsey.
Patsy Ramsey claimed to have come downstairs to the kitchen at five o’clock on Boxing Day morning and found a two-and-a-half page, hand-written ransom note on the landing of their secondary staircase. The author directed the letter at John Ramsey and claimed to represent a group of individuals from a foreign faction who were “in possession” of JonBenet. The note demanded a ransom of $118,000 be paid in certain bills or JonBenet would die.
Boulder Police recorded Patsy Ramsey’s report being phoned in at 5:51 am. Two patrol officers attended and took basic information but did not treat the Ramsey house as a crime scene. It was not secured, nor searched, and an unrecorded number of people had access to the residence until early afternoon when a detective took over and asked a family friend to assist John Ramsey to search the house for “anything unusual”.
The recorded events are confusing but it’s said John Ramsey located JonBenet’s dead body in a far corner of a basement wine cellar, covered with her bedroom blanket. She had a ligature cord around her neck, her hands were bound above her head, and her mouth was sealed with duct tape. John Ramsey apparently removed the tape and carried the body up to the living room where it was laid in front of the Christmas tree. The police were called back and the case began being treated as a homicide.
A forensic crime scene examination identified several points of unsecured ingress to the house but no sign of forced entry nor anything to clearly suggest an unauthorized intruder had been present.
Prominent was the ligature or cord around JonBenet’s neck that was tied to a wooden handle, described as a “garrote”. It was physically matched to a broken paint brush handle in Patsy’s art room which was in the basement, near the wine cellar. Similar pieces of cord were also found in the home. As well, the pad which the note-paper originated from was located on the main floor, as was the pen used to write it.
The Ramsey parents were not formally interviewed, no statements were taken, and continuity of the note—being a prime piece of evidence—as well as its forensic treatment was questionably handled.
The pathologist attended the residence at 6 pm and did a cursory examination of JonBenet’s body before removing her to the morgue. She was dressed in a white nightie and white panties with white tights overtop. The panties and tights were soaked in urine. Postmortem changes were advanced with rigor mortis already passing and early decomposition presenting.
Though the stages of mortis are not precise science for conclusively identifying the time of death, the body’s physical condition suggested that JonBenet had been dead for a considerable time, estimated between 10 pm the previous evening and no later than 5:51 am when the police report was received.
In pathologist John E. Meyer’s words — “Far closer to 10 pm than to 5 am.”
JonBenet’s autopsy determined her cause of death as “asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma” and the medical diagnosis was:
I. Ligature strangulation
- Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of neck
- Abrasions and petechial hemorrhages, neck
- Petechial hemorrhages, conjunctival surfaces of eyes and skin of face
II. Craniocerebral injuries
- Scalp contusion
- Linear comminuted fracture of right skull
- Linear pattern of contusions of right cerebral hemisphere
- Subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage
- Small contusions, tips of temporal lobes
II. Abrasion of right cheek
III. Abrasion/contusion, posterior right shoulder
IV. Abrasions of lower left back and posterior left lower leg
V. Abrasion and vascular congestion of vaginal mucosa
VI. Ligature of right wrist
VII. Toxicology
- Blood ethanol – none detected
- Blood drug screen – no drugs detected
From reading this, it’s clear JonBenet received a massive blow to the upper right of her head from contact with a blunt object, approximately an hour or more before death. This is supported by the contusion (bruise, not a laceration or cut) to her scalp, the linear fractures to her skull, and the subdural (underlying) hemorrhaging (bleeding) in her brain. This cannot occur after death and the known pathology established a considerable time period elapsed between when the blow was administered and when the cardiovascular system stopped functioning. The pathologist opinioned that JonBenet was alive but unconscious for an hour, possibly an hour-and-a-half, before she was strangled.
It’s also clear that ligature asphyxia (strangling with the cord) was her death’s triggering mechanism and this is corroborated by the presence of petechial hemorrhages (tiny bloodspots) in her eyes and on her face. This is a classic symptom of mechanical strangulation and is peculiar to the airway being violently interrupted.
The presence of various abrasions and contusions are evident of physical violence being inflicted on JonBenet prior to death, as is the violation of her vaginal area. Her cheek abrasion is consistent with a slap to the face, her shoulder and legs marks are consistent with her still-alive body being roughly handled as if dragged, but caution must be taken in interpreting her vaginal injury as being consistent with sexual assault.
There was no presence of semen, however some blood spotting was noted in her underwear. Later forensic examination would identify a foreign pubic hair on her blanket and an unknown DNA sample (not semen) on her underwear that was consistent with a male contributor.
The police and district attorney’s investigation focused on the improbability that a total stranger would break into the home, severely wound JonBenet, then kill her at least an hour later after packing her body from an upper bedroom and down two floors to the basement of a house in which three others were present—all the while hanging around to write a lengthy note.
From the start, Patsy Ramsey’s behavior was suspect—as was her husband’s. Though there was no suggestion of previous child abuse in the home, it was well known Patsy Ramsey selfishly promoted her daughter like a trophy doll who she desperately wanted to shine in fame and fortune.
As police and media attention centered on the Ramseys, they limited their contact with investigators and quickly “lawyered-up” until a controlled, counter-offensive in the media could be established.
The evidence against the Ramseys was examined by a grand jury empaneled during a ten-month period in 1998. The jury returned an indictment against John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in JonBenet’s death but was quashed by the district attorney who felt there was no reasonable likelihood of conviction. The grand jury’s findings were sealed and only released to the public in 2013, seven years after Patsy Ramsay’s death from cancer.
To this day, the smoking gun in JonBenet’s homicide is the alleged ransom note.
If the note is legitimate, then it’s a kidnapping that went sideways. If it’s fraudulent, it’s a murder staged to look like a kidnapping. Regardless, there’s no doubt the note’s author is responsible for killing JonBenet and it’s within the note where the killer reveals their true identity.
Let’s look at it:
The note needs to be examined in three ways.
First—was there any forensic evidence present to physically identify the author? I can’t imagine it not being fingerprinted nor examined for DNA, however I can’t find any internet reference one way or the other and existing photos don’t show the normal discoloration associated with chemically checking for fingerprints on paper.
Second—what do forensic handwriting analysists say about the writer? A number of document examiners have analyzed the note and have eliminated John Ramsey as well as fifty-three other subjects as the author. But, they cannot rule Patsy Ramsay out as penning it. To be fair, no one conclusively states she was the writer but all agree the author intentionally attempted to disguise themselves.
Third—what does the science of statement analysis tell us? It’s here where the killer’s identity is revealed.
Let’s look at the note in detail:
Mr. Ramsey,
Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We don respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlierdelivery pick-up of your daughter.
Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with Law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don’t try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don’t think that killing will be difficult. Don’t underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
It is up to you now John!
Victory!
S.B.T.C
The first thing that comes to my mind when reading the note is that it’s nonsense. It’s complete and utter bullshit and here’s why:
A. It’s very long with a lot of unnecessary, redundant information. It’s written on three pieces of paper which took a considerable amount of time to compose. True ransom notes are exceptionally rare and all are short and to the point: “We have your daughter! We will kill her if you don’t give us X-amount of money by __!. Wait for instructions!! DO NOT call the police or she dies!!!”
B. The writer introduces themself as representing a “group of individuals from a small foreign faction“. Foreign? Faction? Who calls themselves a foreign faction?
C. Patsy had been up an hour before calling police.
D. The writer states to not respect Ramsey’s business, but not his country then changes the message by striking out “don’t” to reflect a friendlier tone.
E. The asking sum of $118,000.00 is a bizarre number. Some examiners equate it to a similar salary bonus amount John Ramsey recently collected but how would a foreigner know if it’s even in his bank account never mind how much?
F. Calling “tomorrow between 8 and 10 am” indicates the note was written before midnight on December 25th.
G. “The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be well rested” indicates someone thinking about a lack of sleep before the event is exposed.
H. “And hence” is a unique phrase that’s rarely used except in very formal correspondence or in biblical phrases.
I. There are obvious misspellings in common words like “possession” and “business” while more easily erred words such as “adequate”, “attache (with the accent)”, “deceive”, “deviation”, and “scrutiny”. Otherwise, the writer uses proper punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure which indicates an attempt at disguise by a person with a fair degree of education.
J. The use of exclamation points in only the opening and closing is not realistic of a desperate person’s threat. You’d expect emphasis being put on the instructions to get money and threats to retaliate.
K. “Beheaded” and “stray dog” indicate a feint towards some sort of middle-eastern ethnic decoy.
L. “Proper burial” is indicative of someone who knew what JonBenet’s final disposal would be. Burial was the accepted practice in the Ramsays’ religious faith, rather than cremation.
M. The phrase “two gentlemen watching over” stands right out. “Gentlemen” being a term used in a ransom note? Totally unrealistic. And “watching over” is another term like “and hence” where it doesn’t remotely resemble normal speech, rather it reflects a biblical overtone where “God watches over”.
N. “I advise you not to provoke them” and “I advise you to be rested” are passive statements and reflect a feminine touch.
O. Four times the writer uses the phrase “she dies.” If JonBenet was still alive when the note was written, the author would likely use the term “she will die”. This indicates the writer knew JonBenet was already dead.
P. The note’s address changes from “Mr. Ramsey” being used once to “John” being repeated three times. This is far too familiar for an unknown kidnapper and strongly indicates the writer knew John Ramsey personally.
Q. The closing terms “Victory!” and “S.B.T.C” appear cryptic and of some personal, religious significance to the writer.
A principle behind the science of statement analysis is that truthful people rarely use synonyms. They remain consistent in language whereas deceitful people change language and weave in synonyms to distract. Another principle is that people expose their psychological profile in their writing.
So what does the JonBenet Ramsay note say about the author?
It’s clearly a deceitful attempt to distort the facts, using unrealistic, bizarre, and unbelievable demands to shift attention from the reality of the situation. It’s apparently written by a woman of higher education, with a religious background, familiar with John Ramsey, who can’t bear to bring JonBenet’s name into the equation, yet cryptically reveals a personal message.
It’s written in characters that can’t be eliminated from Patsy Ramsey’s known handwriting and it was written with a Sharpie pen and foolscap paper found in her home—the home in which JonBenet was murdered and who’s body was stashed on the cold basement floor.
Patsy Ramsey denied culpability until her death but denials are cheaper than a thrift store suit. A look at her psychological profile is telling.
Patsy Ramsay was a beauty queen, herself—crowned Miss West Virginia in 1977. She graduated from university with a B.A. in journalism and was a devout member of the Episcopalian church and a wealthy socialite in her community. Perversely, she flaunted an air of modest integrity while flogging every chance to sexually exploit her six-year-old daughter in front of every pageant and camera she could find.
Patsy Ramsey was an educated, articulate, and calculating woman. She was also very religious.
It’s in the Bible where the key to the ransom note’s lock is hidden.
A. The terms “watching over” and “and hence” are consistent with a religious mindset and they are known to be used in the Ramsey family Christmas message which Patsy wrote the year after JonBenet’s death.
B. The numeric figure “118” is highly revealing and it fits with a notable Bible passage recognized by the Episcopalian faith. It’s found in Corinthians 1:18.
C. “For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”
D. Significant are the note’s closings—“Victory!” and “S.B.T.C”. Victory is well established as a Christian slogan which refers to Christ’s triumph by rising from the dead and symbolizing the triumph of good over evil and the forgiveness and everlasting salvation of a soul from sin. “S.B.T.C” is the well-known acronym for “Saved By The Cross.”
E. The “Victory” reference is also revealed in 1 Corinthians 15:51-57.
F. “Behold, I tell you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed. For this perishable must be put on the imperishable, and this mortal must be put on immortality… then will come about the saying that is written “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP IN VICTORY. O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”
In my opinion, there’s a convincing case made that Patsy Ramsay was the author of the ransom note and, therefore, the person who really murdered JonBenet.
It’s also likely that John Ramsey had some knowledge and was covering up for his wife. He’d already had a previous daughter die—now a second—and he couldn’t bear to lose the rest of the family. Only he will know.
But this still leaves the question of why Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter? What were the horrific circumstances that led to such a senseless, barbaric crime?
I think the best theory is offered by Steve Thomas who is the original Boulder detective who investigated the case and wrote the book JonBenet—Inside The Ramsey Murder Investigation.
Detective Thomas postulates that Patsy and John Ramsey returned to their home around 10 pm Christmas Day after a social event. Patsy checked on JonBenet and found she’d been bed-wetting again. At the time, Patsy was already on emotional overload—about to pop a breaker. She was under severe psychological stress with heavy socialite commitments, seasonal depression, struggling to face her fortieth birthday, keeping the perfect face, and… who knows what all else.
With temper stretched, Patsy severely admonished JonBenet for the urinary mess and likely did an aggressive wiping simulation on her daughter’s crotch, accounting for the “abrasion and vascular congestion of vaginal mucosa”. This escalated to a violent event where JonBenet’s head was smashed into a hard, blunt surface such as a doorframe or piece of furniture which rendered her unconscious with a potentially lethal brain injury.
Possibly thinking JonBenet was dead and probably panicking, Patsy went into damage control which may have involved John Ramsey at this point. It’s inconceivable to think he didn’t know or at least suspect something.
Somewhere during the next hour to an hour-and-a-half, JonBenet was finished off with a garrote fashioned from available materials, her body was moved, and the stage was set to simulate a ritualistic killing. A plan was then devised to deceive the authorities by way of a concocted ransom note which contained a cryptic justification with some hope of divine reconciliation.
But what’s really evident to me—why I truly believe both Patricia and John Ramsey were culpable in JonBenet’s murder—is the date on the inscription they jointly approved for the headstone on their daughter’s grave.
They knew she was dead before midnight.
I for one always thought it was an “inside job” and that Patsy “lost it” (all the pressure she was under as you mentioned in the article) and accidentally killed JB. I always thought the ransom note was absurd! As you stated, NO ONE writes a three-page ransom note, and certainly not in the rather “chatty” style in which it was written. It was most certainly written NOT by a man but by a woman. No man would write in that fashion. Of course, Patsy Ramsey is now gone too, and John Ramsey is remarried, I think. Apparently, there will never be any justice for JB. However, I have ALWAYS believed that Burke knows or suspects the truth and has repressed it. His appearance on the Dr. Phil Show was ludicrous and you could tell that he was uncomfortable. That was all a set-up by his father to further make his mother (Patsy) look innocent. Anyway, good summation by you. The whole thing is sad and sleazy!
Thanks for the kudus, Kittcatt. I’m not sure what to make of Burke. I didn’t watch the Dr. Phil segment, but I do recall something where some prominent law enforcement or legal people accused Burke of murdering his sister and that a lawsuit was in the works over their blatant accusation based on no proof whatsoever.
Still gives me chills to read your post about this poor child. She didn’t deserve the abuse she received, but hopefully her mother IS getting what she deserves for killing JonBenet. — I believed from the beginning that, given what slim bits of information were made public, JBR’s death had to be an inside job (the most obvious answer is usually the correct one, right?). Your post hammers that theory home. Thank you for your sad but insightful post. — Waiting to see your next awesomeness!
Good morning, Mary! Great to hear from you, my friend! JonBenet’s death is one of the most tragic cases I’ve ever explored. Her age and the fact that her violent death happened inside of what should have been her safest place put this in the true realm of monstrosity. And tragically, I doubt those responsible will ever account.
As to awesomeness, City Of Danger is progressing. It’s been a year so far and the project has expanded where, realistically, it’s going to be next spring before it’s “perfected”. However, the first pages should be alive for proofing in the fall. Hope your eye is as sharp as ever 🙂
Hi Garry – I’m going to be ‘that person’ who brings up Burke Ramsay. Coincidentally, I fell down the internet rabbit hole on this case about two weeks ago, after reading a random comment that sparked my interest again.
I don’t think Burke is 100% responsible, but there is certainly evidence that points to his involvement. The undigested pineapple in JonBenet’s stomach, the fact that the 911 operator and police detectives heard the voice of a young male on the emergency call tapes, the fact that he had seriously assaulted her with a golf club in the past and was known to be jealous of the attention that went towards JonBenet. He behaved extremely weirdly in his police interviews (I watched the tapes again a week ago) and seemed to have no real feeling about his sister’s death. I also read a couple of body language ‘expert’ opinions on his interview tapes.
My theory is that Burke was having a pineapple snack and JonBenet, who apparently loved pineapple, stole a bit of his snack (hence the undigested pineapple in her stomach). This small transgression enraged Burke and he hit her hard across the head (perhaps with the mysterious flashlight), or slammed her head into a piece of furniture. When he realises JonBenet is seriously injured, that’s when he calls in Patsy and John, who then stage the rest of the crime.
There are so many theories about this case, many of them viable, but I can’t write off Burke 100% because his behaviour is just too odd. I mean, what child would remain sleeping when the house was full of people and his screaming, out of contol mother? What person with any empathy would behave in the manner Burke behaved in his interviews if they were genuinely upset and sorry that their only sister was dead? The fact that he was seriously violent towards her in the past also makes him a suspect, in my opinion. He smashed her on the head with a golf club and she needed stitches! To me, that strongly indicates poor implulse control.
In my rabbit hole moment, I stumbled across a site that had all the DNA testing and retesting results – unfortunately I can’t locate the site this morning. But the retest results indicated that there was quite a strong familial link to the Ramsays in the “unknown male” samples.
Anyway, I think your theory as posted here is mostly correct. I just differ on who did the initial serious head hit. The ransom note is clearly bogus and to me, it smacks of arrogance and “I’m smarter than you, look how clever I am in writing this amazing ransom note!” In her police interview tapes, Patsy comes across as extremely arrogant, defensive and sometimes rude. Exactly the sort of person who thinks they’re smarter than everyone else. As for John, going by his affect in his police interviews, I think he had a hand in staging the murder, but I think he had nothing to do with JonBenet’s death and was a very unwilling participant. And I also get the impression that ‘you don’t say no to Patsy’.
I hope that poor little JonBenet is resting in peace, but I can’t help thinking she’ll rest a lot more peacefully when her killer is known to the rest of us.
Thank you, as always, for a very insightful blog!
Hi Anne – I just stumbled on your comment posted almost a month ago. Thanks for your thoughts. We’ll never know the truth in this case. Perhaps Burke knows more than he told, but the fact remains someone wrote that note and manufactured the garrotte. That’s an adult, not a kid, and that person was the murderer. Again, thanks for you input. Always appreciated! ~Garry
Thanks Garry – and you’re right, we’ll never know the truth. Would be nice if there was a law/way/torture method to force the truth from someone on their deathbed, wouldn’t it!
The article and analysis are interesting and thought-provoking. The sexual interference aspect always made me think, if it was someone in the family, it was the brother (Burke). The explanation you offer in your article is simple, makes sense and flows believably. As for Burke, I watched the Dr. Phil interview which was Burke’s first in 20 years. Today I watched The Behavior Panel’s analysis of the Dr. Phil interview, and to me, it reinforces the Patsy-did-it opinion. I suspect Burke’s still on trauma overload from what happened in the house that night, which has coloured his life ever since. As for the gravestone date, I’d previously read speculation about it, but hadn’t considered it seriously, until reading your analysis and the gravestone date’s logical context.
Thanks for the great article. Keep ‘em coming.
I can’t imagine how F’d-up Burke was/is over his sister’s murder. Where’s Papa John in this whole thing? Financial damage control, I’d think.
Your analysis is of course expert but it is very similar to what I had already pieced together from what I know. How is it possible that the authorities ELIMINATED the Ramseys as suspects? Was that a political decision to cover up their own incompetence in handling the case? And where does the stray public hair come from? Incidentally, I also recall that one of the first officers on the scene had noticed a large metal flashlight in the kitchen (and I think it was even dented). However, in the midst of all that was going on in the house that morning, it disappeared. The suspicion is that this was the object used to strike the child. Another sidenote: I recall that John Ramsey was making regular “business trips” to a foreign country with a red light district that he was known to frequent. Mr. Ramsey also LEFT THE HOUSE to go to work for awhile in the midst of his daughter missing, instead of waiting for more instructions from the “kidnappers.” The DA who quashed the grand jury indictment probably got paid off.
Thanks for your comment, Larry. I’m careful not to go into these details as I’m not sure of the source of a lot of JBR internet information and its credibility. I’ve based this piece, and my conclusion, on two valid and publicly available documents – the autopsy report and the ransom note. Red herrings like the pubic hair could come from any type of cross contamination such as a stray hair in a laundry hamper or on the laundry room floor left by a previous occupant or guest. There is no evidence in the autopsy report that JBR was sexually assaulted so I wouldn’t read anything into the hair when the abundance of suspicion is overtop of Patsy Ramsey as the killer. Thanks again for your comment – I appreciate the input.
I lived very near Boulder at the time and recall being struck at the incompetence (whether deliberate or not) of the investigation. I have to say yours is the best explanation by far that I have seen.
Thanks for the encouraging words, Jeanne! I very much appreciate the positive feedback 🙂
*eavesdropping on previous comments* Has it been five years since you wrote this superb article? Time flies, right? Can’t remember what I wrote then, but I still agree with you. The ransom amount, the headstone, it’s all a little too coincidental.
Yeah, it was late 2016 when I did this, and I still think this is the right solution for this horrific unsolved crime. Like you and I were talking earlier this morning, Sue, both of us have been in this writing biz for ten years. We’ve seen A LOT of changes during this time, especially in our marketing approach. Ya never know what’s around the next internet bend, huh? 😉
Garry, you never disappoint me. When this case came down, I was graduating some teenagers in my house, one in 1995, 1997, and 1998. I was kinda busy, so I’d forgotten a lot of the details, and didn’t know quite a few others. What a horrific case of injustice!
However, I do remember thinking IMHO that it was the parents, one or both. And I do recall wondering if their money, etc., had anything to do with the mismanaged crime scene.
All in all, Miss Ramsey never received justice from the “system”, but I have to hope that when Patsy died, a beginning was made to that.
Looking forward to your Unabomber piece. 🙂
We aim to please around this place, Deb. I doubt the truth will ever come out publicly – unless John Ramsey has a change of heart. I’m sure someone will bring up the “Burke did it” theory but, sorry, I can’t see a little boy authoring that note.
A really great piece of deductive reasoning, Garry, especially the grave stone.
Thanks, Terri. I did this piece up five years ago, and it’s been my most popular post ever with 25,000+ views. I decided to recirculate it today with a few tweaks because I’ve developed a lot more followers since it was originally published, and I sense that many DyingWords folks haven’t read this or don’t quite remember the conclusion.
I was going to do a post today on Theodore (Ted) Kaczynski – the Unabomber but when I began researching him, I found the material to be exquisitely complex, especially his published manifesto and his court-ordered psychiatric evaluation. I needed more time to do the Unabomber case justice so you can expect it in a few weeks. Spoiler Alert – There was nothing crazy about the Unabomber. He was actually brilliant with a tremendous foresight into the current political mess we’ve got ourselves into. He just had a rather unacceptable way about setting up his message.
This case has always baffled me. I wonder if their wealth and status in their community had anything to do with the authorities turning a blind eye. The handling of this case was absolutely in ever way inappropriate. This child died a horrific senseless death and no one was ever held accountable. This is on the police and the district attorneys at that time. What a mockery of the system.
Hi Sue – Great to see you here. It’d be easy for me to sit back and defend the police involved in the difficult JBR case, but I have to say the crime scene was mishandled from the start. The house wasn’t properly secured and searched, and the residents – Patsy, John & Burke – should have been separated and proper statements should have been taken from them immediately. I’m sure the Ramsey’s social status played a part in how this travesty rolled out. I also find it interesting that a grand jury preferred an indictment on Patsy Ramsey and the DA squashed it. IMO, she should have faced a trial and let the trial jurors decide her fate. This certainly isn’t a good example of “the system” functioning properly.